Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Open thread and news 8/27

Community/Meta Discrimination Transgender Rights

– In the GLAD and NCLR challenge to President Trump’s ban on transgender servicemembers, the judge has denied a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, and has denied cross-motions for summary judgment on the merits. The judge held that because the government is denying discovery to the plaintiffs (by refusing certain documents relevant to the outcome) there are still genuine issues of material fact in the case, so the government needs to provide those documents and can’t ask for a ruling on the merits until there’s full discovery.

– The Seventh Circuit has reversed the dismissal of a lesbian’s Fair Housing Act and state law claims in a discrimination case.

This is an open thread and we’ll post any breaking news.

Thanks to Equality Case Files for these filings

54 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. VIRick  |  August 27, 2018 at 5:46 pm

    Oaxaca: Civil Registry Has a Legal Method to Allow for Marriage Equality

    Rule #1 in Mexico: Whenever there's the will, there's always a way. In effect, according to this account, the Civil Registry in Oaxaca has been quietly preparing their own amparo judgments in-house since 2017, thus allowing same-sex couples to marry based solely upon the jurisprudence of Mexico's Supreme Court. Never mind that the Civil Code of Oaxaca has not yet been changed, a point which I have always asserted as not being truly necessary, given the same jurisprudence. This account of their "work-around" maneuver is fascinating, and should be copied by all the Civil Registries in the remaining recalcitrant states:

    (So Far) There Have Been 6 Equal Marriages in Oaxaca in 2018

    (Hasta Ahora) Van 6 Matrimonios Igualitarios en Oaxaca durante 2018

    En lo que va del 2018, seis parejas del mismo sexo contrajeron matrimonio en Oaxaca. Aunque hasta este momento el Código Civil del estado no se ha modificado, desde el 2017, es posible la realización de matrimonios igualitarios sin la necesidad de interponer un juicio de amparo.

    La solicitud de matrimonio igualitario comienza en la Unidad Jurídica del Registro Civil. Ahí se solicita la asesoría para la presentación de un oficio a petición de parte, que a su vez (después de la aceptación) se turna a la unidad jurídica a efecto de elaborar un dictamen en el cual se autoriza la celebración del matrimonio.

    Tras lo anterior, la pareja sólo fija día y hora para el enlace civil. El trámite tarda tres días hábiles y el costo es el mismo que para las personas heterosexuales. El proceso, aunque no requiere más de tres días para recibir respuesta, es amplio en comparación con los matrimonios convencionales en donde la solicitud no lleva más de dos horas. Este lapso de diferencia, explicó Daniel Merlín Tolentino, Jefe de la Unidad Jurídica del Registro Civil, tiene que ver con la elaboración de los dictámenes basados en jurisprudencias.

    El documento debe estar fundado y motivado ya que hasta el momento no se han concretado las reformas para establecer al matrimonio como la unión de dos personas, y no exclusivamente entre un sólo hombre y una sola mujer, como lo establece el código vigente.
    https://www.nvinoticias.com/nota/99848/van-6-matr

    So far in 2018, six same-sex couples have been married in Oaxaca. Although up to this moment the Civil Code of the state has not been modified, from 2017 it has been possible to realize equal marriages without the need to file for an amparo judgment.

    The request for equal marriage begins in the Legal Unit of the Civil Registry. There, the requesting party asks for advice to present their request to the office, which in turn (after acceptance) then requests the legal unit to prepare an opinion (dictamen) in which it authorizes the celebration of marriage.

    After the above, the couple only sets day and time for the civil liaison. The process takes three business days and the cost is the same as for heterosexual couples. The process, although it does not require more than three days to receive a response, is broad compared to conventional marriages where the request does not take more than two hours. This period of difference, explained Daniel Merlín Tolentino, Head of the Legal Unit of the Civil Registry, has to do with the preparation of opinions (dictámenes) based on jurisprudence.

    The document must be well-founded and motivated, as the reforms to establish marriage as the union of two people, and not exclusively between one man and one woman, as established by the current code, have not yet been finalized.

  • 2. VIRick  |  August 27, 2018 at 6:26 pm

    On 27 August 2018, in "Wetzel v. Glen St. Andrew Living Community," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of a lesbian woman's Fair Housing Act and Illinois Human Rights Act claims against a senior housing facility.

    The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Chief Judge Diane Wood, reverses the district court and sends it back for proceedings consistent with this decision. In addition to ruling that Wetzel can bring a claim under the FHA, the appeals court also instructed the district court to reinstate the state law claims it dismissed.

    "Wetzel sued St. Andrew, alleging that it failed to provide her with non‐discriminatory housing and that it retaliated against her because of her complaints, each in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA or Act), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601–3619. St. Andrew insists that the Act affords Wetzel no recourse, because it imposes liability only on those who act with discriminatory animus, an allegation Wetzel had not expressly made of any defendant. The district court agreed and dismissed Wetzel’s suit. We read the FHA more broadly. Not only does it create liability when a landlord intentionally discriminates against a tenant based on a protected characteristic; it also creates liability against a landlord that has actual notice of tenant‐on‐tenant harassment based on a protected status, yet chooses not to take any reasonable steps within its control to stop that harassment. We therefore reverse the district court’s grant of St. Andrew’s motion to dismiss and remand for further proceedings."

    The case was argued at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on 6 February 2018.

    The Opinion is here:
    http://files.eqcf.org/cases/17-1322-48/

    The Final Judgment is here:
    http://bit.ly/2Pd1Ewd

  • 3. VIRick  |  August 27, 2018 at 6:48 pm

    Mexico: Rex Wockner's Marriage Equality State Listing Up-Dated to Include Oaxaca

    Mexico has 31 states plus the federal entity, Mexico City. Marriage equality has arrived in Mexico City and in 13 states — via three different routes: Legislative legalization, Supreme Court rulings, and state administrative decisions to stop enforcing their ban:

    • Baja California (administrative)
    • Campeche (legislative)
    • Chiapas (SCJN ruling)
    • Chihuahua (administrative)
    • Coahuila (legislative)
    • Colima (legislative)
    • Jalisco (SCJN ruling)
    • Mexico City (legislative)
    • Michoacán (legislative)
    • Morelos (legislative)
    • Nayarit (legislative)
    • Oaxaca (administrative)
    • Puebla (SCJN ruling)
    • Quintana Roo (administrative)
    • There are also various cities that stopped enforcing their state's ban, including Santiago de Querétaro, capital of Querétaro state.
    https://wockner.blogspot.com/2018/06/mexicos-wild

    The Wikipedia Listing and Map now need up-dating to reflect this same change.

  • 4. allan120102  |  August 27, 2018 at 8:36 pm

    Hopefully Oaxaca dont turn to be like Guerrero. Now that the news have spread like fire hopefully conservatives dont start molesting the civil registry.

  • 5. VIRick  |  August 27, 2018 at 9:20 pm

    Allan, the people at the Legal Unit of the Civil Registry in Oaxaca appear to be taking extra precautions, first by screening the prospective couples wishing to marry, then by assisting them in filing their application in the correct manner, and finally, once the application has been approved by the clerk in the office, of individually preparing a legal opinion (dictamen), using the jurisprudence of Mexico's Supreme Court as the basis of their opinion in favor of said marriage.

    The shuffling of the paperwork, back and forth several times, from the Legal Unit to the office, then back to the Legal Unit, and finally back again to the office, at which point the civil ceremony can occur, takes 3 days, and is all done "in-house," right there at the Civil Registry, which among other personnel, has its own legal team and judges.

    To anyone who has never lived in Mexico, it is almost impossible to explain how, within the legal system, one can do practically anything one wants to do. In this instance, they have worked out a successful pro-active method of allowing for marriage equality. In many other instances, obfuscation wins, and if similarly-situated authorities do not want to do it, they simply will not lift a finger to assist. And for them, almost any excuse will do,– "The law says, blah, blah," "The Congress has not acted to make any change," whatever (while ignoring the Supreme Court's jurisprudence).

    My only question is this: There are two Oaxacas, the state and the city serving as the state capital. There are a total of 570 municipalities within the state. Since the explanation in the article was written in the singular, I am guessing that the procedure outlined above may only be occurring at the Civil Registry for the state capital, as it would be difficult for me to believe that every municipality within the state has its own properly-trained Legal Unit. Many may only have a part-time, rubber-stamp "judge" with little legal training.

    Still, we do need to remember that the travelling judge from Colima was a civil registry judge in the municipality of Cuauhtémoc, and that she issued something over 300 favorable opinions (based on the jurisprudence of Mexico's Supreme Court) allowing same-sex couples from all over Mexico to marry under her singular jurisdiction in that one municipality. Thus, it is extremely likely that same-sex couples from all over Oaxaca can travel to the state capital, follow their procedure, and marry there.

    I have looked at the article more closely, and in partial answer to my own question, in the upper-left corner above the text, as a heading, it says "Oaxaca/Capital." However, I further note this:

    Fue en marzo de 2017 cuando se llevó a cabo en Oaxaca el primer matrimonio igualitario sin la necesidad de un juicio de amparo de por medio.
    https://www.nvinoticias.com/nota/99848/van-6-matr

    It was in March of 2017 that the first equal marriage was held in Oaxaca, without the need for an amparo judgment in the process.

    So, it would appear that they have been doing this in the city of Oaxaca for the past 18 months, without a lot of publicity or negative backlash.

    In Mexico, that's another rule: Keep quiet, and just do what you think you are supposed to do. (And for me, one is supposed to follow the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. The Legal Unit at the Civil Registry for the city of Oaxaca concurs).

  • 6. VIRick  |  August 27, 2018 at 11:35 pm

    Allan, Guerrero's "problem" was three-fold. First, the state governor made a big newsy splash by personally conducting the first mass same-sex marriage ceremony in Acapulco, thus "invading" the territory of the chief Civil Registrar of Acapulco who was against the entire concept and who felt his authority was being "over-stepped." In retrospect, it might have been wiser for the governor to have remained in the state capital, Chilpancingo, and conduct the ceremony there.

    After several years, and a spotty implementation of marriage equality state-wide (some municipalities followed the governor's executive order, and others did not), Guerrero had elections, and a new governor was elected. Shortly thereafter, under a new administration, marriage equality was suspended state-wide.

    The third factor: Remember our diligent amparo count for each state to reach 5? Querétaro had 5. Oaxaca had 5. Baja California went way over that number before they finally quit obfuscating. However, Guerrero never had a single favorable amparo ruling, and from a very strict legal viewpoint, that lack of state-wide jurisprudence eventually worked against Guerrero. The obfuscators will use any means possible to obstruct, and the lack of state-wide jurisprudence was their chosen means for finally prevailing (for now).

  • 7. allan120102  |  August 28, 2018 at 12:59 am

    Guerrero lgbt activist need to find same sex couples who want to marry in the state. Many are going to Michoacan or Mexico city. that is why its hard getting amparo if at all at guerrero. The last amparo was invalidate I believe and that one was in 2014. so by my count there is not a single amparo in Guerrero the only one in Mexico without amparos. Btw I know Guerrero its one of the most conservative and anti lgbt states but lgbt activist need to step up there game or they are going to be near last to get marriage equality, not even the new legislature base on what I have seen and will take seat in December I believe have promise the lgbt community something. so unless something drastic happens Guerrero will stay without marriage equality for the time being.

  • 8. VIRick  |  August 28, 2018 at 10:40 am

    Inter-American Commission Sends Perú Gay Discrimination Case to CIDH

    Per Inter-American Commission on Human Rights:

    Azul Rojas Marín fue privada de libertad en forma ilegal, arbitraria, y discriminatoria. Perú informó de algunas medidas para cumplir nuestras recomendaciones, pero no presentó propuesta de reparación integral. Enviamos caso a CIDH.
    https://twitter.com/CIDH/status/10341838487483064

    Azul Rojas Marín was deprived of liberty in an illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory manner. Perú reported some measures to comply with our recommendations, but did not submit a proposal for full, complete reparation. We sent the case to the IACHR.

    One can read the entire press release from the Commission, dated 27 August 2018, pertaining to case 12.982 (in Spanish), here:
    http://www.oas.org/es/cidh/prensa/comunicados/201

  • 9. ianbirmingham  |  August 28, 2018 at 12:42 pm

    Half of Americans Can't Even Name A Single Supreme Court Justice

    The survey from C-SPAN released on Tuesday asked likely voters, "Can you name any current Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court?"

    Fifty-two percent of respondents either said no or had an incorrect response.

    Of folks who were able to name a justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the most common answer. Stephen Breyer was the least common…

    https://www.newsweek.com/half-americans-cant-name

  • 10. scream4ever  |  August 28, 2018 at 12:56 pm

    So many people didn't even know a major thing they were affecting when they didn't vote for Clinton.

  • 11. VIRick  |  August 28, 2018 at 4:04 pm

    Ecuador: Appeals Hearing on Cuenca Marriage Cases Tomorrow, 29 August 2018

    Per INREDH:

    INREDH presenta amicus curiae para que se ratifiqué el derecho al matrimonio igualitario en Cuenca. Mañana, 29 de agosto 2018, audiencia de apelación, 08:30 horas, Corte Provincial de Azuay.

    En el texto de 10 hojas ingresado hoy, 28 de agosto de 2018, en la Corte Provincial de Azuay, se solicitó que se acoja el razonamiento técnico jurídico de Inredh en calidad de amicus curiae donde señala que: ninguna norma, decisión, o práctica de derecho interno, sea por parte de autoridades estatales o por particulares, pueden disminuir o restringir, de modo alguno, los derechos de una persona a partir de su orientación sexual, su identidad de género, y/o su expresión de género.”
    https://www.inredh.org/index.php/noticias-inredh/

    INREDH has presented an amicus curiae brief to ratify the right to marriage equality in Cuenca. The appeals hearing is tomorrow, 29 August 2018, 08:30 AM, Provincial Court of Azuay.

    In the 10-page text entered today, 28 August 28, 2018, in the Provincial Court of Azuay, it has been requested that the legal technical reasoning of Inredh be accepted as an amicus curiae brief wherein which it states: no rule, decision, or practice of domestic law, either by state authorities or by individuals, may diminish or restrict, in any way, the rights of a person based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression."

    Note: The extraordinary photo at the link was taken at the Pride March in Quito, 2017.

    INREDH = La Fundación Regional de Asesoría en Derechos Humanos de Ecuador
    (The Regional Human Rights Advisory Foundation of Ecuador)

    Per CEDHU:

    No puede existir discriminación por orientación sexual. La constitución y los tratados internacionales indican que debe evitarse cualquier acto que genere discriminación.
    https://twitter.com/cedhu

    There can not be discrimination based on sexual orientation. The constitution and international treaties indicate that any act that generates discrimination must be avoided.

    CEDHU = Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos de Ecuador

  • 12. Mechatron12  |  August 29, 2018 at 7:26 am

    Well, it looks like there's going to be a referendum on banning gay marriage in Taiwan. To say I don't have high hopes for the result would be an understatement. The attached article is about the gay community attempting to organize a "no" vote on the referendum.

    Where things get interesting is in the highly likely event that this shit passes, what then does the high court do? It would take a Chinese speaker to fully parse the ruling to be sure, but I have heard that the court left "wiggle room" which would mean civil unions and not marriage.
    https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/taiwans-lgbti

  • 13. VIRick  |  August 29, 2018 at 1:05 pm

    Guatemala Congress Considers Retrogressive Bill to Double-Ban Marriage Equality

    Per Rex Wockner:

    Guatemala's Congress is considering a bill to double-ban marriage equality, in direct violation of January's Inter-American Court of Human Rights marriage-equality ruling, which is binding on Guatemala. If it passes, activists say they will head to court.

    Per Luis Barrueto and Rex Wockner:

    La 5272:
    1. Prohibe la enseñanza y la información sobre género y diversidad
    2. Reafirma la prohibición a parejas del mismo sexo para contraer matrimonio, y
    3. Envía a prisión a mujeres que abortan
    https://twitter.com/lebarrueto/status/10345308506

    Bill 5272:
    1. Prohibits teaching and information on gender and diversity
    2. Reaffirms the prohibition for same-sex couples to marry, and
    3. Sends women who abort to prison

  • 14. allan120102  |  August 29, 2018 at 1:15 pm

    Cuenca supreme court or appeals court not sure which will rule in 10 days the appeal made by state. If they rule in favor it will make it the first city and probably province in the country with ssm. https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2018/08/29/no

  • 15. ianbirmingham  |  August 29, 2018 at 1:17 pm

    According to the article, there are actually four (4) referendums pending:

    1) Equal Marriage Referendum (implements same-sex marriage in Taiwan)
    2) Removing Same-Sex Education Referendum (stigmatizes LGBTs in Taiwan)
    3) Straight Marriage Only Referendum (rejects same-sex marriage in Taiwan)
    4) Vote4LGBT Referendum (implements same-sex marriage in Taiwan)

    The article is mainly about the Equal Marriage Referendum (#1).

  • 16. allan120102  |  August 29, 2018 at 1:17 pm

    Like I said in a couple post before the Costa Rican ssm ruling has brought ramnification to its conservatives neighbors. Honduras and Guatemala being the most conservatives are going to fight as much they can ssm and ss adoption.

  • 17. Mechatron12  |  August 29, 2018 at 1:46 pm

    The article is extremely poorly written. That said, I'm pretty sure it is referring to number 3 on your list (a gay marriage ban), as the article states that the gay community is organizing for "One Million Nos". At the end of the article it mentions that the referendum to legalize gay marriage only has about 270K signatures, whereas the bigots got around 600K for each of theirs.

  • 18. VIRick  |  August 29, 2018 at 2:29 pm

    In Ecuador, we are at the appeals court level. The lower-level Cuenca court has already ruled in our favor on two separate cases. The cases were then appealed by the Civil Registry to the Corte Provincial de Azuay, the appeals court for that region of Ecuador (but also located in the same city of Cuenca). The first of the two cases, on appeal, was heard there today, 29 August 2018.

    A positive ruling at this level would not only bring marriage equality to the city of Cuenca, the third most-populous in Ecuador, but also to its entire surrounding province, the Province of Azuay.

    Per INREDH:

    La Corte emitirá sentencia sobre matrimonio igualitario en 8 días en Cuenca. https://www.inredh.org/index.php/noticias-inredh/

    The Court will issue its judgment on equal marriage in 8 days in Cuenca.

  • 19. VIRick  |  August 29, 2018 at 3:04 pm

    Also notice that most of the area in Mexico directly abutting Guatemala already has marriage equality, most importantly, Chiapas, the ex-Guatemalan province they "forgot" to take back after the failure of the short-lived union between the independent republics of Mexico and Centroamérica.

  • 20. VIRick  |  August 29, 2018 at 3:24 pm

    Ecuador: Another "Two Mothers" Case Pending

    Per Silvia Buendía:

    Hoy, 29 de agosto 2018, Ambar y Dora fueron conmigo al Registro Civil en Guayaquil para inscribir a su hijito. Les abro un hilo para contarles como nos fue.
    https://twitter.com/silvitabuendia/status/1034558

    Today, 29 August 2018, Ambar and Dora went with me to the Civil Registry in Guayaquil to register their young son. I opened a thread to tell you how it went.

    The attempt failed. A new lawsuit, based on the "Satya" ruling in Quito, is now pending, this time in Guayaquil.

  • 21. ianbirmingham  |  August 29, 2018 at 8:34 pm

    1) LGBTI activists in Taiwan have launched a campaign to secure votes in an equal marriage referendum likely to take place in November. “Our goal is to win the referendum so the government and parliament will understand the majority of people support marriage equality,” chief organizer Jennifer Lu told Gay Star News by phone on Wednesday (August 29). The Marriage Equality Coalition Taiwan launched the campaign …

    2) The [‘Fight for Happiness’] campaign is also encouraging ‘no’ votes for two more referendums. One on removing same-sex education and another on changing the civil code’s definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. Petitions for these referendums were submitted by the anti equal marriage group on Tuesday. [The second one is the one referred to below in section 3)]

    3a) … a petition by an anti equal marriage group. The petition of more than 600,000 signatures, presented to election authorities on Tuesday, asked for a referendum on the issue. … The Central Election Commission is currently vetting Tuesday’s petition organized by the group named Happiness of the Next Generation Alliance. … in the case of a successful referendum for anti-gay campaigners, Taiwan may instead enact a ‘separate but equal’ law for civil unions between same-sex couples. …

    3b) One million ‘no’s – The ‘Fight for Happiness’ campaign wants one million people to register ‘no’ before the upcoming referendum. The campaign will launch a new website September 10. It will organize 60 events across the country in the next three months to encourage people to vote in November. So far, 31 organizations, 11 individual partners, more than 30 local council candidates and 400 local businesses have joined the campaign. ‘Start the conversation right now,’ urged Lu. ‘Talk to your friends and family,’ she said. ‘Make them understand what is real love and let’s work together to create a better future for Taiwan.’

    4) A separate campaign, Vote4LGBT, is also petitioning for a referendum on the issue. It had collected 270,000 signatures as of Wednesday, according to the group’s Facebook page.

    Summary:

    Marriage Equality Coalition – pro-LGBT – pushing Referendum 1)

    Happiness of the Next Generation Alliance.- anti-LGBT – pushing Referenda 2) and 3)

    Fight for Happiness – pro-LGBT – opposing Referenda 2) and 3)

    Vote4LGBT – pro-LGBT – pushing Referendum 4)

    Referendum 1 and Referendum 4 may actually be the same [single referendum], or if different may later be consolidated into a single pro-marriage-equality referendum.

  • 22. Mechatron12  |  August 29, 2018 at 8:59 pm

    If you'll note, Jennifer Lu who is quoted in paragraph 1) is the same person quoted in paragraph 3b) about the million nos. I really think that in paragraph 1) she is referring to a "no" vote on the bigot's referendum to show that the "majority supports marriage equality".

    But like I said, the article is not well written. I hope this doesn't come across as argumentative because we're absolutely on the same side here, and I'd certainly love to be proven wrong about Taiwan. I just know that many Chinese people still take that man-woman-child family bullshit seriously.

  • 23. VIRick  |  August 30, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    Utah: Judge Recognizes Posthumous Same-Sex Marriage

    After 50 years together, as of 30 August 2018, Bonnie Foerster and Beverly Grossaint are finally married. One of them is already dead.

    The couple was never legally married while both were still alive. When marriage between same-sex couples was legalized in Utah, both women had medical issues that made it impossible for them to marry. Now, three months after Grossaint’s death from pneumonia, the two are finally wives.

    “We’d always wanted to, but life kept getting in the way,” Foerster said. “I’m numb with happiness to finally be a married woman.”

    Utah does not recognize so-called “common law” marriages (which this would otherwise be), but it will recognize certain relationships – even posthumous ones – if a judge agrees that the couple were dependent on each other in certain circumstances. Only one other posthumous marriage has ever been recognized in the state.

    The law stipulates that the couple must have lived together, treated each other like they were married, and presented themselves as a couple that could lead people to think they’d been wed. The surviving partner must then file a petition with the court within one year of their beloved’s death, providing this documentation, all of which was done in this instance, to the satisfaction of the court.
    https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2018/08/50-years-toge

  • 24. JayJonson  |  August 30, 2018 at 3:36 pm

    The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Thursday to force the city of Philadelphia to resume the placement of children in need of foster care with a Catholic agency that refuses to accept gay couples as foster parents.

    Three justices, Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito, would have granted the requested injunction from the Catholic adoption agency.

    Apparently, Chief Justice Roberts joined the four liberals in refusing to grant the injunction.

    Read more here: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-lgbt

  • 25. VIRick  |  August 31, 2018 at 10:49 am

    Quote of the Year (at Least)

    Per Barack Obama, eulogizing John McCain:

    “You know, anyone can make a name for themselves in this reality TV age, especially in today’s politics,” Obama said. “If you’re loud enough or controversial enough, you can get some attention. But to make that name mean something, to have it associated with dignity and integrity, that is rare.”
    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-john-m

  • 26. VIRick  |  August 31, 2018 at 5:24 pm

    Chihuahua: Federal Judge Orders Modification to Transgender Birth Certificates

    Per Cheros AC:

    El dia de hoy, el 21 de agosto 2018, atendiendo a la resolución del Juez Federal, en la que ordena la emisión de actas de nacimiento (modificado) para 3 personas trans en el Estado de Chihuahua, acudimos a las oficinas del Registro Civil del Estado y llevamos a cabo este acto.
    https://twitter.com/Cheros_AC

    Today, 21 August 2018, in response to the decision of the Federal Judge, in which he ordered the issuance of (modified) birth certificates for 3 trans individuals in the State of Chihuahua, we went to the offices of the State Civil Registry and carried out this procedure.

    As proof, this article is accompanied by a photo of one of the trans individuals outside the offices of the Civil Registry in the Edificio Melchor Ocampo, Chihuahua, Chihuahua, holding a copy of the new, modified document.

    CHEROS AC = Centro Humanístico de Estudios Relacionados con la Orientación Sexual, Chihuahua, México

  • 27. VIRick  |  August 31, 2018 at 7:23 pm

    Tamaulipas: Federal Judge Orders Modification to Transgender Birth Certificate

    Per México Igualitario:

    Por primera vez en Tamaulipas, el 30 de agosto 2018, un Juez Federal ordena modificar acta de nacimiento de un mujer trans sin necesidad de tramitar un juicio ante el juez civil de la entidad. Se trata de una mujer trans registrada en Tamaulipas. La adecuación se hará por medio de un trámite administrativo, como en la Ciudad de Mexico (CDMX). https://twitter.com/MX_Igualitario

    For the first time in Tamaulipas, on 30 August 2018, a Federal Judge orders the modification of the birth certificate of a trans woman without the need to process an amparo judgment before a civil judge of the state. It is for a trans woman registered in Tamaulipas. The adjustment will be made through an administrative process, just like in Mexico City (CDMX).

    These two federal court decisions push Chihuahua and Tamaulipas ahead of Kansas, Ohio, and Tennessee, as well as the majority of states in Mexico, as only CDMX, Michoacán, and Nayarit had previously allowed for the modification of birth certificates by the administrative process.

    Note: This is the latest project of México Igualitario, to go state-by-state, obtaining federal judicial rulings in each, forcing said states to recognize the administrative process as the best, most direct means for making necessary modifications to birth certificates to accommodate transgender individuals. In the meantime, anyone born anywhere in Mexico can always have the birth certificate modification done in CDMX, Michoacán, or Nayarit. It is just that they would have to travel to one of them in order to do it.

    Those are the only 3 jurisdictions in Mexico currently with a law specifically allowing birth certificates to be modified, spelling out the detailed procedure to be followed. None of the others have any law dealing with the subject, one way or the other. Instead, they all have entrenched bureaucracies who insist upon doing things the way they have always been done, and will continue to do so until ordered to make the necessary change in procedure. Within the past 10 days, Federal judges in both Chihuahua and Tamaulipas have now ordered both states to make the necessary bureaucratic gender marker modification on birth certificates to accommodate transgender individuals.

  • 28. FredDorner  |  August 31, 2018 at 9:05 pm

    Note that the eulogy was for Beau Biden.

  • 29. JayJonson  |  September 1, 2018 at 5:55 am

    Thanks for the clarification. Obama will be eulogizing McCain this morning. I did not go to the link (where the quote is attributed to Obama's eulogy for Beau Biden) and wondered if Obama had released his remarks ahead of the event this morning, which would be pretty unusual.

  • 30. VIRick  |  September 1, 2018 at 11:08 am

    Very Accurate Negative Critique Regarding "Pink News" Report on Czech Republic

    Per LGBT Marriage News, Retweeting Pink News:

    Jesus Christ, Pink News, when you completely mis-report a story, don’t proudly repost it three months later. To be clear, the Czechs never passed a bill to legalize same-sex marriage. The government just decided to support a bill. No vote has happened yet.

    LGBT Marriage News then added the inaccurate Pink News headline it was referencing:

    "Flashback: Czech government passes vote to legalise same-sex marriage"
    https://twitter.com/LGBTMarriage

    To reiterate: Several months ago, on 22 June 2018, the Czech government formally decided to support a bill (a draft proposal) which would legalize same-sex marriage. However, at the earliest, the parliamentary vote in the Chamber of Deputies on said bill is not set to occur until sometime this fall, that is, in late 2018. Once the bill has passed that chamber, it must then be passed in the Senate and be signed by the President before it can become law.

    Since I am not certain as to the native language of the individual at Pink News who insists on repeating their own inaccurate story, here is what Agenda Gay had to say as a report, per Radio Praha, on the same date:

    Per Agenda Gay: Radio Praha, 22-06-2018:

    El Gobierno checo ha apoyado la propuesta hecha por un grupo de diputados de varios partidos de permitir el matrimonio entre personas del mismo sexo. La decisión se ha tomado a pesar del consejo de los asesores legislativos del gabinete de Andrej Babiš, que recomendaban neutralidad. El tema será ahora discutido en la Cámara Baja como parte de la reforma del Código Civil.

    Does that clarify?

  • 31. ianbirmingham  |  September 2, 2018 at 11:20 am

    Defiant Kaczynski says Poland must avoid EU's 'social diseases'

    Poland belongs in the European Union but should be careful not to be “infected by social diseases” that dominate the bloc, ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski said on Sunday.

    While underlining the need for Poland to remain inside the bloc, his party says the EU is forcing member states to conform to standards [like accepting SSM] that contravene Poland’s traditional family values.

    On Sunday, Kaczynski said EU membership was “the shortest way for Poland to achieve parity when it comes to living standards” with its western allies.

    “But that doesn’t mean we should repeat the mistakes of the West and become infected with social diseases that dominate there,” he added.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-poland-politic

  • 32. VIRick  |  September 2, 2018 at 11:37 am

    New BCS Deputies Promise to Discuss Same-Sex Marriage and Euthanasia

    Per Rex Wockner:

    Nuevos Diputados de BCS Prometen Discutir al Matrimonio Gay y la Eutanasia

    La Paz, Baja California Sur (BCS) – Al iniciar el primer periodo ordinario de sesiones del primer año de la nueva XV Legislatura al Congreso del Estado, el Presidente de la Mesa Directiva, Ramiro Ruiz Flores, destacó en la tribuna que se sacarían de la “congeladora” temas polémicos y relevantes para la sociedad sudcaliforniana, tales como el matrimonio gay y la eutanasia.
    http://www.bcsnoticias.mx/nuevos-diputados-de-bcs

    La Paz, Baja California Sur (BCS) – At the beginning of the first regular session of the first year of the new XV Legislature of the State Congress, the President of the new Congress, Ramiro Ruiz Flores, stressed from the rostrum that controversial and relevant issues to BCS society would be removed from the "freezer," such as marriage equality and euthanasia.

  • 33. Mechatron12  |  September 2, 2018 at 1:32 pm

    I wonder what "social diseases" he was referring to. I'm not being sarcastic, knowing Poland he could just as easily have been referring to Muslim immigration or something like that.

    It's funny to hear this Kaczynski run his mouth on morality, considering he is a lifelong confirmed bachelor who has long been rumored to be gay.

  • 34. ianbirmingham  |  September 2, 2018 at 4:03 pm

    Polish president says Poland will "never" legalise same-sex marriage

    The President of Poland says gay marriage will never be legalised in the country, despite growing pressure from lobby groups and neighbouring European countries.

    President Duda cited the Constitution when asked about the future of marriage equality in Poland.

    “I do not think that the political majority today would agree to any amendment to the Constitution in this area, water down this clause and open interpretation that marriage could also include other genders,” he told Republika. ,,,

    Poland is one of six countries in the European Union that have constitutionally banned gay marriage, along with Croatia, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia.

    https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/agenda/ar

  • 35. ianbirmingham  |  September 3, 2018 at 12:39 am

    Women caned in Malaysia for attempting to have lesbian sex

    Two women found guilty of attempting to have sex have been caned in Malaysia's conservative north-eastern state of Terengganu, in the first punishment of its kind.

    While women in Malaysia have been caned for sexual offences in the past, such as adultery, rights activists say this is the first time two women have been caned for attempting to have sex.

    The two women were fined by the sharia high court on 12 August, after they pleaded guilty to committing musahaqah, or sexual relations between women.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/03/wom

  • 36. VIRick  |  September 3, 2018 at 11:47 am

    Brasil: Massive Fire Destroys National Museum

    A massive fire lit up the 200-year-old National Museum in Rio de Janeiro on Sunday night, 2 September 2018, destroying the millions of objects that it housed, including some of the first fossils found in the country. The museum, known as the Museu Nacional, was home to Portuguese royalty until 1892, when it became one of the largest museums of natural history in the Americas. It housed artifacts from all over the world and covered topics like anthropology, archaeology, and paleontology.
    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mbvd/a-massi

    Note: Post-independence, Brasil was the only nation of the Americas to have been ruled by transplanted European royalty. Even had the building been empty, their former royal palace, which then became the national museum once Brasil became a republic, was in and of itself an historic structure of merit well worth preserving.

  • 37. VIRick  |  September 3, 2018 at 12:47 pm

    Austria: Justice Minister Prepares for Marriage Equality

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    Austria: Minister Moser: Ehe und Eingetragene Partnerschaft für alle

    Justizminister Josef Moser (ÖVP) hat nach längerer Prüfung entschieden, wie der Spruch des Verfassungsgerichtshofes zur "Ehe für alle" umgesetzt werden soll: Es wird nicht nur die Ehe für Homosexuelle geöffnet, sondern umgekehrt auch die Eingetragene Partnerschaft für Heterosexuelle.

    Der VfGH hat im Dezember 2017 die gesetzliche Regelung aufgehoben, die homosexuellen Paaren den Zugang zur Ehe verwehrte – und zwar per 31. Dezember 2018. Ab 1. Jänner 2019 können also auch gleichgeschlechtliche Paare heiraten und umgekehrt heterosexuelle Paare eine Eingetragene Partnerschaft eingehen, sollte der Gesetzgeber nicht anderes beschließen. ÖVP und FPÖ haben die "Ehe für alle" immer abgelehnt.
    https://www.sn.at/politik/innenpolitik/minister-m

    Minister Moser: Marriage and Registered Partnership for All

    After a long examination, Minister of Justice Josef Moser (ÖVP) has decided how to implement the verdict of the Constitutional Court on "marriage for all:" Not only is marriage opened to homosexuals, but registered partnership for heterosexuals is also opened.

    In December 2017, the Constitutional Court repealed the legal provision that denied gay couples access to marriage – as of 31 December 2018. From 1 January 2019, same-sex couples may marry and vice versa, heterosexual couples can enter into a Registered Partnership, should the Legislators not decide otherwise. ÖVP and FPÖ have always rejected "marriage for all."

  • 38. allan120102  |  September 3, 2018 at 1:36 pm

    Iceland could follow denmark and lift the ban on blood donations from gay people. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g3fYDb13Wtg

  • 39. VIRick  |  September 3, 2018 at 1:36 pm

    Panamá: Zulay Rodríguez Says No to Equal Marriage and Yes to De Facto Unions

    Per LGBT Marriage News:

    Panamá: Zulay Rodríguez Dice No a Matrimonio Igualitario y Si a Uniones de Hecho

    Panamá – La precandidata a la presidencia de la República por el Partido Revolucionario Democrático (PRD), Zulay Rodríguez, manifestó en el programa Radar, “No estoy de acuerdo con el matrimonio igualitario, pero si la unión de hecho de las personas del mismo sexo que vienen viviendo (juntos) durante largo tiempo, porque son adultos mayores.”
    https://www.critica.com.pa/nacional/zulay-dice-no

    Panamá – The pre-candidate for the presidency of the Republic for the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD), Zulay Rodríguez, said on the Radar program, "I do not agree with marriage equality, but with de facto unions for same sex couples who have been living (together) for a long time, because they are older adults."

    Note: For the up-coming presidential elections in Panamá, this statement from the opposition candidate is about as strong as it gets in opposing marriage equality under current conditions in Panamá. In addition, the candidate from the governing party, one which has backed marriage equality, is Laurentino Cortizo, who has a much higher chance of winning the presidency.

  • 40. scream4ever  |  September 4, 2018 at 11:27 am

    So does this mean that the ruling parties could overturn it?

  • 41. ianbirmingham  |  September 4, 2018 at 12:25 pm

    The museum had no sprinkler system, and limited water was available from fire hydrants when firefighters arrived. … The interior of the building was mostly wood, and safety upgrades were difficult to make because of federal rules governing historically protected sites.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/09/it-was-for

    New rule: "Historical Preservationists" must all perform 24-hour shifts of rotating continuous residence inside all the super-dangerous buildings that their "preservation" rules prevent from installing safety upgrades…

  • 42. allan120102  |  September 4, 2018 at 1:44 pm

    Mexico federal government might legalize ssm before all the states abide by the supreme court jurisprudence. With a very left congress there is no excuse for not passing it http://amp.nacion321.com/congreso/austeridad-y-an

  • 43. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 1:57 pm

    Scream, my German is terribly limited, and Google Translate was not overly helpful in its abilities either. That one clause, with what seems to be a double-negative, was quite difficult:

    " . . . sollte der Gesetzgeber nicht anderes beschließen."

    In any case, Minister of Justice Josef Moser (ÖVP) is moving ahead on implementing what he has interpreted to be the court orders from the Constitutional Court (Der VfGH), as outlined in that report. To the best of my knowledge, the Legislature, in the meantime, has not lifted a finger to move the start-up date forward, that is, to move it closer to today's date (their only option, as per the same court orders).

    The Legislature can not veto or negate the Constitutional Court's orders even though the two governing parties are opposed to "marriage for all." Remember, marriage equality is to commence on 1 January 2019, or sooner, if the Legislature deems to move its start-up date into 2018.

  • 44. ianbirmingham  |  September 4, 2018 at 1:59 pm

    The Primate of the Church of Nigeria says homosexuality is “veritably poisoning” the Nigerian society, blames the development on the influence of Western culture

    http://dailypost.ng/2018/09/04/anglican-primate-o

  • 45. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 2:35 pm

    We are poised for a "race" in Mexico between the federal government and a variety of previously recalcitrant states on the issue of same-sex marriage, once the newly-elected members of the several legislatures take their seats in December.

    For examples, see the post on Baja California Sur (above), Yucatán (previous thread), and Veracruz (not yet posted, but where Morena could likely pass it single-handedly).

    My only lingering concern are the 4 remaining states which, to the best of my knowledge, still do not have the necessary 5 amparo judgments to set statewide jurisprudence on the matter of same-sex marriage:

    Durango – 1
    Guerrero – 0
    Tlaxcala – 1
    Zacatecas – 3

    All the other 15 states currently without statewide marriage equality have at least 5, if not 30-40, or more. For these last remaining four states, we either need additional positive amparo judgments or state congresses willing to pass same-sex marriage legislation directly.

  • 46. Mechatron12  |  September 4, 2018 at 3:01 pm

    Pardon my ignorance Rick, but if the federal government legalizes marriage equality, wouldn't it extend to ALL states, even those without enough amparos? Or am I missing something? I know the amparos matter when dealing with their Supreme Court, but I didn't think they mattered when dealing with legislation.

  • 47. Mechatron12  |  September 4, 2018 at 3:05 pm

    I was under the impression that the OVP and in particular the FPO were just being spiteful c*nts by refusing to move up the effective date. Even if they had the ability, they'd get shredded by the voters if they tried to overturn marriage equality.

  • 48. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 3:43 pm

    This is actually an untested matter. Off hand, one would think that federal legislation would over-ride any/all state legislation to the contrary. And it probably does, if written correctly and quite specifically.

    In fact, as per LGBT Marriage News, today, 4 September 2018, two federal senators for Morena, Germán Martínez Cázares and Martha Lucia Micher Camarena, already introduced a bill into the Senate recognizing marriage equality at the federal level, that is, for purposes of federal taxation, pensions, immigration, and at embassies, and specifically before the IMSS and ISSSTE.
    http://acustiknoticias.com/2018/09/martinez-cazar

    See also:
    http://www.jornada.com.mx/ultimas/2018/09/04/pres

    But today's bill will not be enough. I have already seen arguments that marriage is still a state matter, and that this federal legislation would not be binding on any given state that still refused to abide by it, as it only applies to federal institutions. Despite this, the 15 with statewide court jurisprudence have no legal leg to stand on (and haven't had any legal leg to stand on for quite some time, that is, from whatever date they reached the 5 amparo judgments against them, even without federal legislation). However, there is likely to be a legal loophole for the 4 without statewide jurisprudence, assuming their state congresses also refuse to act.

    Still, I do see one alternative. In Mexico, the matter of birth certificates has already been federalized (although it did take a while to be fully implemented, given the opposition from the obfuscators, and including the very recent federal court rulings against both Chihuahua and Tamaulipas for violating federal standards). There is now one uniform federal form which has standardized the practice throughout Mexico. In turn, the federal government has delegated the various states to administer this standardized form for them.

    Any federal legislation on marriage would have to follow this same concept, federalizing the issuance of marriage licenses by standardizing the form and practice, and then delegating to the various states the administration of it for them in a uniform manner. So, any federal legislation would thus have to involve itself in all the very detailed procedures regarding the issuance of marriage licenses using a standardized federal form and practice, while merely delegating the responsibility of administering such to the various states, but with strict oversight. Knowing Mexico, this is all easier said than done. But it did work with the birth certificates, even though it took a number of years for full implementation to occur, and in a way, is still a work-in-progress, especially on the transgender gender-marker modification issue.

    IMSS = Medicare/social security for private sector employees
    ISSSTE = Medicare/social security for federal government employees

  • 49. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 4:34 pm

    Mechatron, "Yes" and "Yes" to both points, although with regard to the first, if we said it in German, we would end up with an appropriately cute little rhyming ditty, "die bösen Mösen."

  • 50. ianbirmingham  |  September 4, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    John McCain Will Be Replaced With A Former Republican Senator Who Rabidly Opposes LGBTQ Rights

    Jon Kyl has a history of voting against LGBT rights. He co-sponsored a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages nationwide, voted for the Defense of Marriage Act that was overturned by the Supreme Court, and repeatedly voted against adding sexual orientation to hate crime laws.

    As a Senator, Kyl voted against the nomination of Justice Elena Kagan because she didn’t support the now-overturned “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy that prevented gays and lesbians from serving in the military, saying it was “bad policy.” During her confirmation hearing, she also refused to say she opposed marriage equality.

    https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2018/09/john-mccain-w

  • 51. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 5:14 pm

    Lambda Legal Sues in Federal Court for Release of Kavanaugh White House Papers

    Per Equality Case Files:

    Today, 4 September 2018, as the US Senate started the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, Trump’s nominee for the US Supreme Court, Lambda Legal and American Oversight filed a lawsuit to compel the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to immediately produce records related to Kavanaugh’s work in the George W. Bush White House. The lawsuit, filed in US District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges the agencies’ failure to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in August that sought documents related to Kavanaugh’s involvement in Bush administration policies that discriminated against LGBTQ children, families, and relationships.

    Lambda Legal's press release is here:
    https://www.lambdalegal.org/news/dc_20180904_lamb

    Their federal court filing is here:
    https://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/d

  • 52. VIRick  |  September 4, 2018 at 9:51 pm

    Chile: After 5 Years, Senate Finally Passes the New Gender Identity Law

    Per Caribe Afirmativo:

    Hoy, 4 de septiembre 2018, con 26 votos a favor y 14 en contra, Chile aprueba la Ley de Identidad de Género … avanza la igualdad!
    https://twitter.com/Caribeafirmativ

    Today, 4 September 2018, with 26 votes in favor and 14 against, Chile approves the Gender Identity Law … equality advances!

    El Senado aprueba ley de Identidad de Género, pero deja fuera a menores de 14 años. La Cámara Alta aprobó cambio registral para adultos y mayores de 14 años. Sin embargo, no se logró el quórum necesario para incluir a niños.
    http://www.t13.cl/noticia/politica/video-senado-a

    The Senate approves the Gender Identity Law, but leaves out children 14 years of age and under. The Upper Chamber approved the registry change for adults and those over 14 years. However, the quorum needed to include children was not achieved.

  • 53. Randolph_Finder  |  September 5, 2018 at 3:41 am

    I truly think the Anglicans are going to implode/explode at some point in the next decade, there is just too much of a gap between the two halves of the religion…

  • 54. allan120102  |  September 5, 2018 at 8:49 am

    Breaking as soon as tomorrow consensual gay sex could be legal in India. Would be tremendous for lgbt activists. https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nat

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!